The term “castration” brings a chill to every man. The idea of having your ‘junk’ cut off is horrifying. It’s barbaric. Castration is like the archaic practice of locking someone in stocks or something that would be seen in a third world country, but not the United States But it’s not. It is used in our modern world, including America. Not only do many other countries have castration laws, but several of our states do as well. Even as recent as last year, states have been approving the chemical castration of sexual predators. But what is chemical castration and how does it work?
[FAC NOTE] Would someone please correct this hack reporter who writes, “However, sex offenders reoffend 67% of the time”? The rest of the article is informative, but that harmfully WRONG statistic is glaring.
A group opposing the Tennessee lawmaker who proposed chemical castration for all registrants has won a lawsuit as their free speech was being threatened by this lawmaker.
https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/politics/2020/08/01/judge-tennessee-election-law-incompatible-first-amendment/5551097002/
Now that I think about it, aren’t the SO registries, in essence, a form of government sponsored segregation?
This is what happens when you get a guy studying economics to write such an article.
Seems the website isn’t allowing comments so I’ll just leave his FB page in case anyone wants to educate this fool directly:
https://www.facebook.com/rocky.ferrenburg.5
For the non-FB crowd , he has a website but no listed email, just a contact form:
https://rockyferrenburg.com/
I sent my message to Rocks for brains.
WHL
Very well said and sad but true.
Mr. Ferrenburg also messed up on his use of “sexual predator”. He was referring to “sexually violent predator”.
FYI…
Most Journalists are members of The Society of Professional Journalists, spj.org, and ACCEPT SPJ’s Code of Ethics…Obviously, this ‘Rocky’, who is NO Rocky Balboa, failed in his attempt to Properly report the FACTS which means he NEVER did his due diligence that a professional journalist would have performed prior to print!
https://embryo.asu.edu/pages/skinner-v-oklahoma-1942
Chemical castration is simular to the sterilization in Skinner v Oklahoma and is unconstitutional.
All he had to do was read his own source.
If you click on the link at the word recidivism in the article and scroll down the referenced document it states, “People who served sentences for sex offenses were much less likely to be rearrested for another sex offense (7.7%) ………” The 67% number is for all crimes that might land a RSO back in jail.
How hard is this to do.
These reports, though, do take a certain intelligence level to understand. I have to reread them several times, putting all the different parts together to fully understand what the research is saying. It also takes a little bit of a mathematical mind to draw correct conclusions from these reports. I think people, such as this author, have preconceived conclusions and are quickly “grasping at straws” to find “data” to back up their incorrect conclusions.
Isn’t chemical castration contradictory to sex offender laws?
Think about it.
The process of chemical castration involves using a chemical that blocks production of testosterone and increases the production of estrogen.
This is the very same process used in performing a sex changes.
And sex offenders are (last i was aware) prohibited from receiving sex change procedures.
Aren’t these contradicting laws?
Using the law to force someone to break a law.
What? A reasonable argument? Get out of here. 🤣👍
May as well get full blown barbaric and lop off the hands of thieves.
Ok, so we all know that when it comes to articles mentioning “human rights” and “consent” when speaking about punishment for those with sexual offenses, the masses will respond with “What about the rights and consent of the victims?”
How do you reply to those types of comments?
This is a civilized country. All castration would do is lead to the person being castrated being vengeful and that person would most likely wind up doing something of a more serious nature as a way to vent his/her frustration!
I would have to disagree. America used to be a country that stood on the moral high ground. But today our country condones the forced homelessness to hundreds of American citizens in Miami, all for the almighty dollar. We force people into plea bargains by threatening them and their families, rather than drop cases that are weak in evidence or has no evidence. We punish some people for life and choose to incarcerate others for life even when their time is served, because of what we think they could do. We have militarized our police force so they see us as enemies rather than American citizens who made mistakes. Our Federal government forces states to adopt harsh sex offender laws by threatening to remove federal assistance. Rather than violate the laws of Justice, we used to err on the side of caution. Yet just this week another man was released from Death Row in Florida after being found not guilty by DNA. Death row! Not probation or some registry, but death row.
Our justice system is now run by prosecutors who want to become judges and politicians who want reelection, rather than by officers of the court who care about the law and the American justice system. We no longer care about protecting the innocent and prosecuting the guilty in a fair and balanced way. We have become Nimby’s who cry “Kill em all and let God sort them out” by our very own actions. Our country has lost its way, and I’m afraid we will never get it back.
I am not someone who hates America. I am an American, born in the United States, a war vet who served in the military, and a citizen who has lived and worked in foreign countries, some third world. I used to feel sorry for some of those countries when I saw them against my own. Now we are no different, and I might argue, worse than those I used to pity.
America is not civilized. We have Registries. And it wasn’t all that long ago that we had segregation. And on and on.
We like to think we are civilized. But nope.
This is cruel and unusaul punishment in violation of the US Constitution’s 8th Amendment. Anyone who argues otherwise should familiarize themselves with the true story of World War II code-breaker named Alan Turing. He was the leader of the team that cracked the German Enigma code. Turing, who, in addition to being a genius codebreaker and inventor of an early prototype computer, was also gay. Being gay in back then was illegal, and Alan Turing was arrested and convicted of “gross indecency.” His punishment was, in lieu of prison, chemical castration. Within two years of the sentence, he died by cyanide poisoning; later ruled a suicide. His purported suicide has been disputed by his family and some historians. It may have actually been death by the chemicals used to castrate him.
I have been trying to correct this mistake since I first read this article yesterday morning. When I click on “comments” at the top, the website will not respond. Is anyone else having success with the comment section? Let me know if you find a way that I can get on.
In the meantime, I have gone to thelibertarianrepublic.com website and am contacting them there. I am also searching for a way to contact the author, Rocky Ferrenburg.
He is taking this info (incorrectly) from the DOJ’s May of 2019’s report on the recidivism rates of released inmates whose most serious offense was rape or sexual assault, which of course does not include ALL the different types of sex crimes for which a person can be arrested. This study was over a 9-years period. In addition, the 67% was an arrest of ANY type of crime and ONLY for an arrest — not necessarily a conviction. Just think of how many individuals Volusia and Polk Counties have added to this 67% for people who are not a threat to anyone.
I have been reading that this DOJ report, which is valuable research data for our cause, is being GROSSLY misused by many sources, including this article.
The authors of articles like this should be stripped of there authority to write and publish such garbage. Why is chemical castration even an option when the side effects are so horrible that physical castration is more humane. He pulls out statistics like numbers out of a bingo game and uses them like he knows what he’s talking about.
I’m not a Trump supporter ,but he popularized the expression “ fake news” here we have a perfect example. It should be legal to sue for such blatant misrepresentation of facts.
I went to the article and can’t find anywhere to leave a comment or send a message to the author.
The hyperlink for the 67% recidivism rate referenced in the article connects to a study discussed at https://www.prisonpolicy.org/blog/2019/06/06/sexoffenses/
This study actually says the opposite of what the author quoted (see below for the full text). The author of this article either completely misunderstood or intentionally distorted the statistics he referenced.
“Less than 67% of those who served time for rape or sexual assault were rearrested for any offense, making rearrest 20% less likely for this group than all other offense categories combined (84%). Only those who served time for homicide had a lower rate of rearrest (60%).
People who served sentences for sex offenses were much less likely to be rearrested for another sex offense (7.7%) than for a property (24%), drug (18.5%), or public order (59%) offense (a category which includes probation and parole violations).
Only half of those who served sentences for rape or sexual assault had a new arrest that led to a conviction (for any offense), compared to 69% of everyone released in 2005 (in the 29 states with data).”
https://rockyferrenburg.com
https://thelibertarianrepublic.com/contact-us/
(202)903-9113
Thank you! Thank you!
He actually sourced that statistic, but either interpreted the graph incorrectly or knowingly misrepresented it.
https://www.prisonpolicy.org/blog/2019/06/06/sexoffenses/
The graphic provides data on recidivism rates broken down by original offense categories. What the author misses is that it is a rearrest (and not even a conviction) for ANY OTHER CRIME, not necessarily the same one. As we all kn ow, this could be for any number of things, including parole or supervision violations. He also fails to mention that recidivism rate for sex offenses is actually the LOWEST among those listed. That kind of leads me to believe it was more of an intentional misrepresentation.
Yes, because renaming it just makes it better, what a complete load of crap. Humanity is it’s own worse enemy, and this just goes to show how fiendish these people really are, as they are perfectly fine with violating human rights hence becoming a form of offender themselves.